Journal 1
1-15-08
Logos, Pathos, Ethos PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
We use appeals everyday when we talk to people. We read them in the newspaper and we see them on television. Companies use them to convince us to buy their products. It is important to know how to use these appeals, logos, pathos and ethos in our writing. They are needed if we want to communicate our message and convince our readers of something.
The appeal that I use the most in my writing is pathos. I appeal to the readers motions such as sadness, guilt or fear. One way that I have found to be effective in appealing to the readers emotion is to write in more detail. Instead of just writing don’t drink and drive add some detail and emotion. A more effective way might be to say, ”The limp bloody remains of a two year old child was removed from the wreck after a drunk drive slammed into her mothers car.” This detail appeals to a young readers emotions of guilt, fear and sadness. This would be more effective in convincing teenagers not to drink and drive.
Logos is another appeal I use in my writing. I feel comfortable using logic to make my point, for example. If you study hard, attend all your classes and do your best you will get good grades in college. I have used this appeal when I have written papers in marine biology in the past.
The appeal that I have trouble with is ethos. When I write I don’t really think about being credible or trustworthy. I have to work on writing with confidence and I am the expert, make strong points and don’t take the middle of the road. Politicians use ethos a lot when they are convincing people to vote for them. I need to learn to use it in my writing.
If a writer wants to communicate with the reader and be able to convince them they need to be able to use all the appeals. Logos, pathos and ethos are important. We all use them when we talk to other people and we all need to be comfortable in using them when we write.
In Plain English Analysis
1-20-08
In Plain English: Let’s make It Official
In the article In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006 he believes that the US Senate should declare English the country’s “Official Language”. This is a very important issue because of the large number of Spanish speaking immigrants that are coming to this country from Latin America. Never before in the history of the United States has one group of people that all speak the same language immigrated here. There are many places in America where Spanish is the primary language and English is secondary. To make sure that this doesn’t happen and that English remains our language Krauthammer believes that the Senate needs to make it our “Official Language”.
This article is very effective and uses the three types of persuasion very well. In the very first paragraph Krauthammer uses ethos and establishes his credibility and knowledge of bilingualism. He grew up in Quebec where they speak French and the rest of Canada speaks English. He saw the issue cause,” social unrest terrorism, threats of separation and a referendum that came within a hair’s breadth of breaking up Canada. Logos in the writing makes us feel confident that America shouldn’t even worry about Spanish immigrants because it’s logical that we will find a way to handle the problem. Krauthammer writes, “One of the major reasons for America’s great success as the world’s first universal nation,” for its astonishing and unmatched capacity for assimilating immigrants”. This is also pathos it makes us proud and makes us emotional.
I have been to retail stores in Miami where all of the signs and all of the announcements were in Spanish. My father has ten employees that are from Mexico that don’t speak English. Classrooms in Florida have a teacher and a translator for Spanish students. With all the these things I have seen in Florida it makes me agree with Krauthammer . If you are going to become an American citizen you need to be able to speak English. Make English the,” Official Language” and do it now. article
Tiffany Sedlar
1/22/08
In Plain English: Let’s make It Official PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
In the article In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006 he believes that the US Senate should declare English the country’s “Official Language”. This is a very important issue because of the large number of Spanish speaking immigrants that are coming to this country from Mexico and other countries. There are more people that speak Spanish moving to this country then ever before in the history of the United States. There are many places in America where Spanish is the primary language and English is secondary. To make sure that this doesn’t happen and that English remains our language Krauthammer believes that the Senate needs to make it our “Official Language”.
This article is very effective and uses the three types of persuasion; ethos, logos and pathos. In the very first paragraph Krauthammer uses ethos and establishes his credibility and knowledge of bilingualism. He grew up in Quebec where they speak French and the rest of Canada speaks English. He saw the issue cause, social unrest terrorism, threats of separation and a referendum that came within a hair’s breadth of breaking up Canada. . (Krauthammer page 1) As readers and in our lives we trained to always consider the source when we read or hear something. Knowing that the author grew up in Canada during a time when having two languages almost broke up the country gives him credibility and the right to voice his opinion in this article. If Krauthammer had not grown up in Canada and had knowledge of this subject he wouldn’t be considered a good source – so he would be less believable.
Kruthammer uses Logos very well in the article to make us feel confident that America shouldn’t even worry about Spanish immigrants because it’s logical and expected that America will find a way to handle the problem. Krauthammer writes, the of the major reasons for America’s great success as the world’s first universal nation, for its astonishing and unmatched capacity for assimilating immigrants”. (Krauthammer
Page 1) America has a problem with Spanish speaking immigrants – a very big problem – I hope we are able to correct the problem like we always have in the past.
The use of pathos in this article makes us proud to be an American and emotional. It makes us question why the Senate won’t pass a bill that would make English the official language of this country. Kruthammer uses: anger, fear, joy, pride and disgust to make the reader want to do something about the problem. This article makes the reader fearful because Kruthammer suggests that English is the US.’s national and common language. But that might change over time unless we change our assimilation norms. (Kruthammer page 2)
I have seen what happens when English is not the primary language in a city. Last year I was in a Big K Store in Miami. This is a Spanish and Cuban area where very few people that live there speak English. All of the signs in the store were written in Spanish and all of the announcements were in Spanish. It made me feel very uncomfortable almost like I wasn’t in America – I was the outsider and didn’t belong in the store. This is exactly what Kruthammer was talking about when he wrote, when immigrants, like those in Brooklyn, are members of a myriad of linguistic communities, each tiny and discrete, there is no threat to the common culture. (Krauthammer Page 1) They don’t hurt anything by speaking Spanish but it does hurt the State Of Florida because; the State has to print forms and books in English and Spanish, the street signs are in English and Spanish, translators have to be hired. My father has ten employees that are from Mexico that don’t speak English. Classrooms in Florida have a teacher and a translator for Spanish students. With all of these things I have seen in Florida it makes me agree with Krauthammer .
Kruthammer uses the persuasion ethos to gain credibility with readers. He does this by telling us that he grew up in Canada during a time when having two official languages; French and English came close to breaking Canada in two. He also uses Logos to show that it is logical to think that America will have an answer to the problem of Spanish speaking people moving here. Kruthammer uses pathos very well to make us emotional about the topic. He makes us want to do something about the problem and to ask the question, why won’t the Senate of the United States make English the Official Language? This article is very effective and I agree with the Author. If you are going to become an American citizen you need to be able to speak English. Make English the,” Official Language” and do it now.
1-27-08
suc·cess /səkˈsɛs/ - [suhk-ses] -
–noun
1.
the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors.
2.
the attainment of wealth, position, honors, or the like.
3.
a successful performance or achievement: The play was an instant success.
4.
a person or thing that is successful: She was a great success on the talk show.
5.
Obsolete.
1-31-08
Brute I believe the word brute means a brutal or insensitive person. In the story Brute by Richard Seltzer, I believe the doctor is the brute. I first believed the black man was the brute, but after further analysis I now believe the doctor is the brute. Doctors should be professional and shouldn’t stitch someone’s ears to the table. The black man was beaten, the doctor was tired, but that is no excuse for acting unprofessional. When the black man was brought into the hospital he had been beaten by a huge group of people. He had blood dripping into his eyes, couldn’t see and had a gash on his forehead. The police then jump on him and hand cuff him. The man would not hold still because he was shaken up from what had just happen. The doctor was the brute because he threatened the man and pinned his ears down to a table to make him hold still. This was a very unprofessional act for the doctor to do. The doctor threatened the man by saying “Move, and you’ll rip them off.” His only excuse for doing this evil act is that he is tired. The doctor made a bad decision and that was not the right thing to do.
Tiffany Sedlar
1-31-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Word Paper
You Can Earn Success PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
Success is defined as the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors, the attainment of wealth, position, honors or the like. (Dictionary .com) The definition is very clear, but if you were to ask one hundred people how they would define success they could all have different answers.Success means something different to every person - even worse a person could change their minds hundreds of times throughout their lives depending on their age and at what stage of life they are in – lets face it each person needs to come up with their own definition of what the word success means to them. If you look closely you will see that successful people are all around us; they may be students, teachers, professors, politicians, athletes and businessmen just to name a few, but what makes these people successful when so many others fail?Most people associate money, power and being famous as things that make them a success.I don’t believe that the attainment of wealth, position, honors or the like is a good definition of success.The definition of success has to include the word,” earned”, in it.A definition that I would accept is, “An attempt or endeavor in which one earns wealth, position, honors or the like.”The best example of a successful person that I can think of would be someone who beats all of the odds and went from having nothing to earning wealth, position and honors. Success is earned, it can’t be given to you, you can’t inherit it or you can’t get it by luck.I don’t believe a person is successful because they win a lotto jackpot of a million dollars or ten million dollars.I believe that this person didn’t do anything to earn this success it was just luck. If a person was to inherit money from a family member or take over their business, which was really the success, you or you’re relative?I would say that the relative was the success and the person was just lucky to be related to them. On the other hand, if a person worked in a family business for years and they were part of its growth, then they have earned the right to inherit the business so that it could continue on. There is a big difference between earning your success and the attainment of something.
In contrast, I would consider a person who was on the New England Patriot’s football team, but never played a single minute a success. The reason I would consider this person a success is because he has earned the right to be a part of a professional football team.Even though this person never played in a game, they still participated in practice every day and risked being injured.They may have done other things to help the team including making other players on the team better. . To be a successful college student it is important for us to earn our grades.If all of the Alma College professors decided to give every student an A, whether they had earned it or not, would we consider ourselves to be successful college students.I don’t think so, and attaining the A this way wouldn’t feel nearly as good as an earned A the old fashion way.It feels great to get an A on your report card! Success that is earned gives us a feeling of satisfaction and gives us the confidence to do our best in the future. Successful people all have similar traits and if we want to be successful college students we need to have these traits as well. Some of the traits that I think a successful college student should have are to work hard, keep a positive attitude, don’t procrastinate and learn from your failures.If we have all of these traits, we will earn the right to be successful students, but if we don’t have any of these traits than we really have our work cut out for us. The people that do the best in my classes have all of these traits.The students that don’t earn good grades don’t seem to have all of these traits. They are the ones that are always having fun at Joe’s, always have time to do things because they skip their classes, never find the library and don’t really seem to care about college. Many parents including my own make student’s pay for part of our education at Alma College.Parents know that if a student is willing to pay for part of their college with their own money than that means that they are serious about their future.If the student has an investment in their education, they will take it more seriously and their chance of earned success is much higher than if the parents have paid for everything. When students use their own money to pay for college they seem to take it more seriously and work very hard to make sure they don’t loose their investment. Something earned by hard work is always of greater value than something given to us. Earned success is more valuable than attained or received success. Hard work is the key to anyone’s success.To earn something it all begins with hard work. For over two hundred years people have come to America to live the American dream of becoming wealthy and successful.This dream is very simple, if a person works hard and uses the talents that they have they too can become a success in America, one of the wealthiest countries in the world.People have left there families behind in other countries, and risked their lives just for the chance at success. Today thousands of Mexican immigrants cross the border illegally just for that chance of earned success in America. The best example of the American dream and earned success is a person who is homeless and lives on the streets as a beggar.Against all odds they get themselves off the streets, and get a start, and then build a fortune of wealth.Movies, television and the evening news remind us that success like this is possible every day. A recent movie titled Trading Places, is an example of a modern day homeless to wealth story.The main character in this movie is Billy Ray Valentine.He is homeless and lives on the streets of Philadelphia and he is a beggar.He lies, cheats and steals to survive.He has all the skills to earn success.He is smart, a good speaker and a good businessman but he never has the chance to prove himself. Billy Ray becomes part of a bet between the Duke brothers and they make a homeless person the head of their company.When given the chance Billy Ray did very well as the head of their company.The Dukes paid him a salary of $80,000 per year and they gave him a car, home, new clothes, a butler and an expense account.Billy Ray went from a homeless beggar on the street to a successful business man.This is what people work for, and this is why so many people come to America, to have a chance at earned success. There are many ways to become successful in America today.People still become successful by working hard and saving their money, but there are also many ways to get rich quick.You can get rich by winning the lotto, gambling at a casino, becoming a professional athlete, becoming an actor or actress, the stock market, real estate and many more.No matter how much wealth, power or honors a person has they should not be considered a success unless they have truly earned it.
Tiffany Sedlar
2-2-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Journal #3 PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
The word that I chose for this paper was success.It was a challenge to argue that my definition was better than the one I found on Dictionary .com.It took me a long time to think of something to write about and it was the first time I wrote an argument paper. The point that I could think of to argue was that success can only be earned it can’t be attained.This was actually something that my coaches and parents have told me all my life.My coaches have always said,”Hard work and teamwork will lead to success and if you want it you have to earn it.” The strategies that I used to argue my point were analogies and definition of the word.I also used pathos, logos and ethos to make my argument stronger and more believable. The analogies that I used to make my point compared different ways you can attain success. Through luck you can be successful by winning the Lotto, or gambling, or you can have earned success like working hard to accomplish something. For and example of working hard I used an example of a college student and the things I do to be successful.I also used my experience as a college student as my ethos to gain credibility.The logos that I used, is that if you work hard in college, the result will be good grades and students will earn their success.To make the reader feel the emotion of what earned success can feel like I used the story of the homeless person rising to success. Earned success feels a lot better than success that was given to you.
Using these strategies for success I believe that my argument to change the definition of success from attained success to earned success was convincing.Success means something different to different people, but most would agree that the harder you work or the more you risk to earn success the more it means and the better it feels.
Tiffany Sedlar
2-17-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Analysis and Evaluation
The two essays that will be analyzed and evaluated are Success of Military Diversity Proves Affirmative Action Worksby Wesley Clark and Affirmative Action Doctors Can Kill Youby Linda Chavez. Affirmative actions helps blacks and Hispanics get into college; get jobs, and government positions that they would have a hard time getting on their own. It has been around for many years and it has always been an issue of debate.Clark and Chavez continue this debate by offering strong arguments that are for and against it, but in the end one makes a stronger and more effective argument in my opinion. Wesley Clark has seen affirmative action succeed in the military and he offers an opinion that he is in favor of affirmative action, and that it is the only way to eliminate discrimination in America.He is very positive about his opinion but in the end offers the reader very little evidence to support his claims. Linda Chavez on the other hand shows that when black and Hispanic students are accepted into medical school because of affirmative action everyone involved is hurt and it may lead to fewer qualified doctors.Her essay is clearly against affirmative action and she offers evidence rather than opinions to support her claims.Linda Chavez’s essay is very persuasive because it appeals to emotion and offers excellent supporting evidence when compared to Wesley Clark’s that is strong in ethos but lacks evidence.
Clark and Chavez use logos, ethos, pathos, insights, assumptions and overgeneralizations very effectively to make their arguments in favor and against affirmative action.Chavez however, is much more effective than Clark in the use of logos and pathos.She seems more believable because she offers statistics and examples of what affirmative action does to the people involved. Because she is so much more effective that Clark in these two areas I think that most readers would side with her and would not want affirmative action.
Both writers use logos in their writing to help make their argument stronger.Clark writes, but the end of segregation did not mean the end of discrimination. Racial hatred has deep and pernicious roots in our nation’s history.It is a cancer that needs to be cured, and affirmative action has been one of the most effective treatments.(Clark, page 127)Clark’s argument that affirmative action can end discrimination seems logical.Chavez writes that, more than 3500 white and Asian students were not admitted to schools CEO studied, despite having better test scores than black and Hispanic applicants who were given preferential treatment. Since grades and, in particular, MCAT scores are very good predictors of performance on the licensing exams, we know that a higher percentage of these students would have passed the exams if they had been admitted. (Chavez page 129) Her argument seems logical that the better a student does on the MCAT the better they will do on medical licensing tests.
The writers use of ethos is were I found myself siding with Linda Chavez and disappointed with Wesley Clark.Clark saw discrimination growing up he wrote, Growing up in Little Rock, I saw firsthand the ugly legacy of racial discrimination. After the local schools were closed because of the battle over desegregation, I had to go to school in Tennessee for a year. (Clark page 127) He also showed that he was an expert in the field by writing, I know this firsthand from my 34 years in the United States military. (Clark page 127) I really expected Clark to be an expert on affirmative action.Instead he just offered his opinion and he didn’t write about studies, statistics and success stories.He seemed to be very interested in stopping discrimination but he didn’t do a very good job of showing how affirmative action stopped discrimination.
Linda Chavez is the opposite of Wesley Clark.The essay doesn’t say who she is, what her experience is or even where she is from.She has no credibility on her own, but her credibility as a writer comes from her sources.Her first source was a book written by William Bowen and Derek Bok called The Shape Of The River.Chavez wrote that racial preference was being given to minority students at the undergraduate level applies to graduate schools, too, including medical schools.(Chavez page 129) Her second source was The Center For Equal Opportunity (CEO).She found that black and Hispanic students are being admitted to medical school with substantially lower college grades and test scores than whites and Asians. (Chavez page 129)White and Asians didn’t get into medical school even though they had better test scores than Black and Hispanic students, it just doesn’t seem fair. The third source that she uses is the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT).From this source Chavez writes, but more disturbing even than the finding that medical schools seem to be admitting less qualified students on the basis of race and ethnicity is that many of these students can’t pass their licensing exams. (Chavez page 129)In my opinion these sources gives Chavez much more credibility than Clark.She uses all of these sources to show that affirmative action is wrong and that our doctors are not as qualified because of it.She makes a really strong case and I start to agree with her argument that affirmative action may be wrong.
Both Clark and Chavez use pathos effectively in their writing.However, I found myself more angry or thinking that something needs to be done about affirmative action when I read Chavez’s essay.Clark’s use of pathos makes us proud to be Americans. Clark writes, As a result of these policies, the military is one of the most integrated institutions in America. And our country is safer today because it is defended by a diverse, integrated, talented military that is the envy of the world! (Clark page 127) We feel safe we are protected by the best military in the world.What evidence does Clark offer that would make us believe that the military is the envy of the world because of affirmative action?None, and without answering this question he will never win the argument in my opinion. Clark needs to do a better job of getting the reader emotional about the topic.
Chavez uses pathos to make a real strong argument against affirmative action. She gets your attention right away in her title Affirmative Action Doctors Can Kill You.This title puts fear in the readers mind.If we go to a doctor that got into medical school because of affirmative action they may not be qualified and they may kill us.She starts out with this strong statement and ends with one as well, and all the rest of us-of all colors-suffer, too, from a shortage of qualified doctors. (Chavez page 129)This is intended to make the reader angry or emotional and make them want to stop affirmative action.The use of ethos by Chavez makes the reader start to agree with her argument and her use of pathos clearly makes her the winner of the argument.
Both writers use Insights to make their argument.Clark writes, the military is, in many ways, a microcosm of our society.(Clark Page 128) Clark makes this statement to show that if affirmative action works in the military it will work in society.Chavez also uses insights she writes,For the first time ever , we now have the hard numbers to prove that medical schools routinely give preference to less qualified black (and sometimes Hispanic) applicants than to others.This is new information and the main reason she doesn’t agree with affirmative action.
Assumptions are a big part of Clarks essay and they are also found in Chavez’s essay. Clark writes, the achievement of a diverse student body at a university, like the achievement of a diverse officer corps in the military, will make Michigan a better, more well rounded, more just institution.This information is an assumption and not based on fact.Too much of his paper is based on assumptions and opinions.Chavez also uses assumptions she writes, the assumption has been, however that these students somehow catch up over the next four years and go on to be just as successful as their white and Asian peers.Chavez uses this assumption to prove that affirmative action in medical schools does not work.
Overgeneralizations are used by both writers to make their arguments.Clark writes that, I believe without hesitation that we Democrats are right in our belief that affirmative action is good for all Americans.(Clark Page 127) Chavez also uses generalizations, she writes,by now, most Americans have gotten used to the idea that colleges and universities apply double standards when it comes to admitting black and Hispanic undergraduates-even if they don’t like it very much.
Both writers use logos, insight, assumptions and overgeneralizations very well to make their argument for and against affirmative action. Chavez however uses ethos and pathos much better than Clark. She seems more believable because she offers statistics and examples of what affirmative action does to the people involved. Because she is so much more effective that Clark in these two areas I think that most readers including myself would side with her and would not want affirmative action.
Proposal Questions
3-5-07
1.Should we build a fence around America to control immigration?
Some people think that we should build a fence around America to keep immigrants from other parts of the world out.Others believe that this will never work. How could we build a fence around the whole country and make sure no one climbs over it, they say it would just be impossible.And what about the 16 million illegal immigrants already in America?The fence will just keep them in America.Each presidential candidate has their own plan to deal with this problem but it is very unlikely that a fence around the country is the answer.
2.Will we ever have National Healthcare?
More than46 million people in America don’t have health insurance today. They don’t have insurance because they can’t afford it or they can’t get it.If these people have to go to the hospital, they either have to pay for it or the bill never gets paid. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama think it is best to have health care for all Americans. They will offer the same insurance that they have as Senators to all Americans.Most people in America think that National Healthcare is a good idea.If one of these candidates win it is likely that we will have National Healthcare in the future.
3.Should we remove all of our troops from Iraq?
Most people in America would like to see the war end in Iraq and all of our troops come home safely.At this point this is very unlikely to happen.John McCain has said that we will have troops in Iraq for the next 100 years.Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama call for a slow removal. With more than 230,000 troops in Iraq today it is not likely that all troops will be coming home soon.They are there to help the Iraq government keep peace until the government of Iraq is strong enough to keep the peace themselves.The troops are not the only Americans in Iraq there are business people, construction workers, charity workers and government officials.
Many people fear thatall Americans will be killed if they are left behind in Iraq.These people include the thousands of Americans there helping to rebuild the country.There are also many charities working there.The Red Cross alone has thousands of workers.And the government workers helping to form a government in Iraq.We can’t just remove all of our troops from Iraq.All Americans will be at risk.
Tiffany Sedlar
3-13-07
1. An Analysis of Senator John McCains Health Care Reform Plan , January 9, 2008
Summary: John McCaines plan for health care is completely different than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.His focus will be on costs.He believes that insurance is a personal choice and each individual has to take responsibility for that decision.He will make sure health care is affordable for everyone.
2. Black, Kevin. “2 Plans and Many Questions on The Uninsured.” The New York Times.
Summary: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have similar plans to change health care in The United States.Clinton would make health care mandatory for every American. Obama would lower premiums so every American could afford insurance but wouldn’t make it mandatory.Most agree that this would never work.
3. Krugman, Paul “Clinton, Obama, Insurance.” The New York Times
Summary: Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in favor of universal health care.Hillary Clintons plan will cover all Americans.Obama’s plan will not be mandatory so millions of Americans will not have health insurance.
Summary: Barack Obama will make affordable health insurance available to all Americans.It will be a national health plan.All children will have to have health insurance.Obama feels that all adults will want to have insurance because it will be affordable.The health insurance that will be available to all Americans is the same insurance government employees have now.
5. Rau, Jordan “Political Muscle Health Care Hints” Los AngelesTimes
Summary: Govenor Arnold Swarzenegger said that uninsured patients that never pay their bills costs hospitals in California billions of dollars.Tax payers end up paying these bills in a “Hidden Tax”, it costs the average family in California 1,200.00 a year.
6. Reinhardt, Uwe E. “Time for Health Care Realism” The Philadelphia Inquirer
Summary: Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in favor of universal healthcare.Congress is very unlikely to support any form of universal healthcare.So it really doesn’t matter what either of them say or promise.Congress are the ones that will vote no on the issue and they are likely to vote no.They are not willing to spend 60 to 110 billion dollars on health insurance.
3-18-03
First part of paper
Healthcare Vote 2008
In November voters will elect a new President of the United States.There are many reasons why people vote for different candidates. One of the issues that voters are concerned about this year is Healthcare. Healthcare has become a major problem for millions of Americans.Healthcare in America is no longer the best in the world. The cost for healthcare has also gone up so much that many people can no longer afford it.Because people can no longer afford health insurance millions of adults and children don’t have any insurance at all.They just hope that they don’t become sick or need to go to the hospital.The Presidential election has been narrowed down to three candidates.Two of these candidates are Democratic and one of them is a Republican.The Democratic Party has promised the people of America change.The two candidates are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both of these candidates have promised to completely change Healthcare if they are elected President.The Republican Party does not believe that much change is needed in our healthcare system.John McCain will be the Republican Party’s candidate for President in November.He doesn’t believe that the government should make people have health insurance.He believes it is a personal choice for every American.The one promise that John McCain does make is that he will lower the cost of health insurance so that more people will be able to afford it.The programs that these candidates have come up with are very different.It is up to the voters to decide which candidates program will be the best for them.
The problems with health insurance include the millions of Americans that are uninsured or underinsured because of rising medical costs. This has happened because health insurance premiums have risen 4 times faster than wages over the past 6 years.The result is that over 47 million Americans – including nearly 9 million children – lack health insurance with no signs of this trend slowing down. (Plan For A Healthy America page. 2)
Arnold Schwarzenegger the governor of California said that the heavy cost of providing medical care to the 47 million uninsured people, through emergency rooms and the like is a “hidden tax”.He also said, “And as you know, by federal law emergency rooms are not allowed to turn away anybody.So with the 6.5 million uninsured residents, California has a health care crisis, we have a serious crisis.In just this one hospital alone here they’re sending out bills worth 60 million dollars a year that are related to ER care, but they have not been paid. Now, multiply that out by the amount of hospitals that we have in California and it will come out with a number that goes into the billions. (Political Muscle page. 1)
Schwarzenegger goes on to say, “ Now, guess who is paying for those billions of dollars? It’s you, me, everyone is paying for that.So working families who have medical insurance get clobbered with hidden taxes; as a matter of fact, each individual pays an additional $400 to $500 on those hidden taxes, and a family of four pay $1,200.(Political Muscle page. 1)
The candidate that wants to change health care the most is Hillary Clinton.Her plan for health care will change it completely.She believes as does Arnold Schwarzenegger that America can’t keep paying the hospital bills for 47 million uninsured people. Right now there are over 47 million people that don’t have health insurance in America, under Hillary Clintons plan every person will be required to have health insurance.She believes that the only way to achieve universal health coverage, and to make the marketplace fair and efficient , is to require that everyone have insurance.(2 Plans and Many Questions on the Uninsured page.1)
Hillary Clintons plan is called, ”The American Health Choices Plan”. There are five major parts to her plan. (1)Offer new Coverage Choices for the insured and Uninsured:Americans can keep the insurance that they have now if they like it.If not, they can choose to have the same insurance as the Congress has now.In addition to the broad array of private options that Americans can choose from, they will be offered the choice of a public plan option similar to Medicare. (The American Health Choices Plan, page. 1) (2)Lower Premiums and Increase Security: This plan will lower insurance costs and improve the quality of health care.The plan ensures that if a person loses their job or they become sick they will not be dropped from their insurance.No American be refused insurance coverage because they have been sick. (3)Promote Shared Responsibility:This plan ensures that all who benefit from the system share in the responsibility to fix its shortcomings. (The American Health Choices Plan page 2.)Insurance companies, drug companies, individuals, providers, employers and government are all going to have to work together for this plan to fix the health care problem. (4)Ensure Affordable Health Coverage for All:Working families will receive a refundable tax credit to help them afford high-quality health coverage.Small businesses will receive a health care tax credit as an incentive to have health care for their employees. (5)A fiscally Responsible Plan that Honors our Priorities:Over half the savings come from the public savings generated from Hillary Clinton’s broader agenda to modernize the health systems and reduce wasteful health spending. The plan offers tens of millions of Americans a new tax credit to make premiums affordable. (The American Health Choices Plan page. 3)
Many people think that her plan can work because she is requiring that every person has health insurance. It will be mandatory for everyone.According to Jonathon Gruber MLT who is one of America’s leading health care economists insuring every American is critical and this can only be done through mandates.Mr. Gruber finds that a plan with mandates would cost taxpayers about $2,700 per person to cover every person.As with any economic analysis, Mr. Gruber’s result are only as good as his model.But they’re consistent with the results of other analysis, such as a 2003 study, commissioned by the Robert Wood Foundation, that compared health reform plans and found that mandates made a big difference both to success in covering the uninsured and to cost effectiveness.And that’s why many health care experts like Mr. Gruber strongly support mandates. (Clinton, Obama, Insurance page.2)
Hillary Clinton believes that her plan is the right one for America.She says,” My plan covers all Americans and improves health care by lowering costs and improving quality.If you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans without coverage or if you don’t like the coverage you have, you will have a choice of plans to pick from and you’ll get tax credits to help pay for it.If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. It’s a plan that works for America’s families and America’s businesses, while preserving consumer choices.” (The American Health Choices Plan page. 12)
Barack Obama has also promised to completely change healthcare if he is elected President.He thinks that millions of Americans don’t have health insurance because it is too expensive.
Journal 1
1-15-08
Logos, Pathos, Ethos PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
We use appeals everyday when we talk to people. We read them in the newspaper and we see them on television. Companies use them to convince us to buy their products. It is important to know how to use these appeals, logos, pathos and ethos in our writing. They are needed if we want to communicate our message and convince our readers of something.
The appeal that I use the most in my writing is pathos. I appeal to the readers motions such as sadness, guilt or fear. One way that I have found to be effective in appealing to the readers emotion is to write in more detail. Instead of just writing don’t drink and drive add some detail and emotion. A more effective way might be to say, ”The limp bloody remains of a two year old child was removed from the wreck after a drunk drive slammed into her mothers car.” This detail appeals to a young readers emotions of guilt, fear and sadness. This would be more effective in convincing teenagers not to drink and drive.
Logos is another appeal I use in my writing. I feel comfortable using logic to make my point, for example. If you study hard, attend all your classes and do your best you will get good grades in college. I have used this appeal when I have written papers in marine biology in the past.
The appeal that I have trouble with is ethos. When I write I don’t really think about being credible or trustworthy. I have to work on writing with confidence and I am the expert, make strong points and don’t take the middle of the road. Politicians use ethos a lot when they are convincing people to vote for them. I need to learn to use it in my writing.
If a writer wants to communicate with the reader and be able to convince them they need to be able to use all the appeals. Logos, pathos and ethos are important. We all use them when we talk to other people and we all need to be comfortable in using them when we write.
In Plain English Analysis
1-20-08
In Plain English: Let’s make It Official
In the article In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006 he believes that the US Senate should declare English the country’s “Official Language”. This is a very important issue because of the large number of Spanish speaking immigrants that are coming to this country from Latin America. Never before in the history of the United States has one group of people that all speak the same language immigrated here. There are many places in America where Spanish is the primary language and English is secondary. To make sure that this doesn’t happen and that English remains our language Krauthammer believes that the Senate needs to make it our “Official Language”.
This article is very effective and uses the three types of persuasion very well. In the very first paragraph Krauthammer uses ethos and establishes his credibility and knowledge of bilingualism. He grew up in Quebec where they speak French and the rest of Canada speaks English. He saw the issue cause,” social unrest terrorism, threats of separation and a referendum that came within a hair’s breadth of breaking up Canada. Logos in the writing makes us feel confident that America shouldn’t even worry about Spanish immigrants because it’s logical that we will find a way to handle the problem. Krauthammer writes, “One of the major reasons for America’s great success as the world’s first universal nation,” for its astonishing and unmatched capacity for assimilating immigrants”. This is also pathos it makes us proud and makes us emotional.
I have been to retail stores in Miami where all of the signs and all of the announcements were in Spanish. My father has ten employees that are from Mexico that don’t speak English. Classrooms in Florida have a teacher and a translator for Spanish students. With all the these things I have seen in Florida it makes me agree with Krauthammer . If you are going to become an American citizen you need to be able to speak English. Make English the,” Official Language” and do it now.
article
Tiffany Sedlar
1/22/08
In Plain English: Let’s make It Official PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
In the article In Plain English: Let’s Make It Official written by Charles Krauthammer in June of 2006 he believes that the US Senate should declare English the country’s “Official Language”. This is a very important issue because of the large number of Spanish speaking immigrants that are coming to this country from Mexico and other countries. There are more people that speak Spanish moving to this country then ever before in the history of the United States. There are many places in America where Spanish is the primary language and English is secondary. To make sure that this doesn’t happen and that English remains our language Krauthammer believes that the Senate needs to make it our “Official Language”.
This article is very effective and uses the three types of persuasion; ethos, logos and pathos. In the very first paragraph Krauthammer uses ethos and establishes his credibility and knowledge of bilingualism. He grew up in Quebec where they speak French and the rest of Canada speaks English. He saw the issue cause, social unrest terrorism, threats of separation and a referendum that came within a hair’s breadth of breaking up Canada. . (Krauthammer page 1) As readers and in our lives we trained to always consider the source when we read or hear something. Knowing that the author grew up in Canada during a time when having two languages almost broke up the country gives him credibility and the right to voice his opinion in this article. If Krauthammer had not grown up in Canada and had knowledge of this subject he wouldn’t be considered a good source – so he would be less believable.
Kruthammer uses Logos very well in the article to make us feel confident that America shouldn’t even worry about Spanish immigrants because it’s logical and expected that America will find a way to handle the problem. Krauthammer writes, the of the major reasons for America’s great success as the world’s first universal nation, for its astonishing and unmatched capacity for assimilating immigrants”. (Krauthammer
Page 1) America has a problem with Spanish speaking immigrants – a very big problem – I hope we are able to correct the problem like we always have in the past.
The use of pathos in this article makes us proud to be an American and emotional. It makes us question why the Senate won’t pass a bill that would make English the official language of this country. Kruthammer uses: anger, fear, joy, pride and disgust to make the reader want to do something about the problem. This article makes the reader fearful because Kruthammer suggests that English is the US.’s national and common language. But that might change over time unless we change our assimilation norms. (Kruthammer page 2)
I have seen what happens when English is not the primary language in a city. Last year I was in a Big K Store in Miami. This is a Spanish and Cuban area where very few people that live there speak English. All of the signs in the store were written in Spanish and all of the announcements were in Spanish. It made me feel very uncomfortable almost like I wasn’t in America – I was the outsider and didn’t belong in the store. This is exactly what Kruthammer was talking about when he wrote, when immigrants, like those in Brooklyn, are members of a myriad of linguistic communities, each tiny and discrete, there is no threat to the common culture. (Krauthammer Page 1) They don’t hurt anything by speaking Spanish but it does hurt the State Of Florida because; the State has to print forms and books in English and Spanish, the street signs are in English and Spanish, translators have to be hired. My father has ten employees that are from Mexico that don’t speak English. Classrooms in Florida have a teacher and a translator for Spanish students. With all of these things I have seen in Florida it makes me agree with Krauthammer .
Kruthammer uses the persuasion ethos to gain credibility with readers. He does this by telling us that he grew up in Canada during a time when having two official languages; French and English came close to breaking Canada in two. He also uses Logos to show that it is logical to think that America will have an answer to the problem of Spanish speaking people moving here. Kruthammer uses pathos very well to make us emotional about the topic. He makes us want to do something about the problem and to ask the question, why won’t the Senate of the United States make English the Official Language? This article is very effective and I agree with the Author. If you are going to become an American citizen you need to be able to speak English. Make English the,” Official Language” and do it now.
1-27-08
suc·cess
–noun
1-31-08
Brute
I believe the word brute means a brutal or insensitive person. In the story Brute by Richard Seltzer, I believe the doctor is the brute. I first believed the black man was the brute, but after further analysis I now believe the doctor is the brute. Doctors should be professional and shouldn’t stitch someone’s ears to the table. The black man was beaten, the doctor was tired, but that is no excuse for acting unprofessional.
When the black man was brought into the hospital he had been beaten by a huge group of people. He had blood dripping into his eyes, couldn’t see and had a gash on his forehead. The police then jump on him and hand cuff him. The man would not hold still because he was shaken up from what had just happen.
The doctor was the brute because he threatened the man and pinned his ears down to a table to make him hold still. This was a very unprofessional act for the doctor to do. The doctor threatened the man by saying “Move, and you’ll rip them off.” His only excuse for doing this evil act is that he is tired. The doctor made a bad decision and that was not the right thing to do.
Tiffany Sedlar
1-31-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Word Paper
You Can Earn Success PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
Success is defined as the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors, the attainment of wealth, position, honors or the like. (Dictionary .com) The definition is very clear, but if you were to ask one hundred people how they would define success they could all have different answers. Success means something different to every person - even worse a person could change their minds hundreds of times throughout their lives depending on their age and at what stage of life they are in – lets face it each person needs to come up with their own definition of what the word success means to them. If you look closely you will see that successful people are all around us; they may be students, teachers, professors, politicians, athletes and businessmen just to name a few, but what makes these people successful when so many others fail? Most people associate money, power and being famous as things that make them a success. I don’t believe that the attainment of wealth, position, honors or the like is a good definition of success. The definition of success has to include the word,” earned”, in it. A definition that I would accept is, “An attempt or endeavor in which one earns wealth, position, honors or the like.” The best example of a successful person that I can think of would be someone who beats all of the odds and went from having nothing to earning wealth, position and honors.
Success is earned, it can’t be given to you, you can’t inherit it or you can’t get it by luck. I don’t believe a person is successful because they win a lotto jackpot of a million dollars or ten million dollars. I believe that this person didn’t do anything to earn this success it was just luck. If a person was to inherit money from a family member or take over their business, which was really the success, you or you’re relative? I would say that the relative was the success and the person was just lucky to be related to them. On the other hand, if a person worked in a family business for years and they were part of its growth, then they have earned the right to inherit the business so that it could continue on. There is a big difference between earning your success and the attainment of something.
In contrast, I would consider a person who was on the New England Patriot’s football team, but never played a single minute a success. The reason I would consider this person a success is because he has earned the right to be a part of a professional football team. Even though this person never played in a game, they still participated in practice every day and risked being injured. They may have done other things to help the team including making other players on the team better.
. To be a successful college student it is important for us to earn our grades. If all of the Alma College professors decided to give every student an A, whether they had earned it or not, would we consider ourselves to be successful college students. I don’t think so, and attaining the A this way wouldn’t feel nearly as good as an earned A the old fashion way. It feels great to get an A on your report card! Success that is earned gives us a feeling of satisfaction and gives us the confidence to do our best in the future.
Successful people all have similar traits and if we want to be successful college students we need to have these traits as well. Some of the traits that I think a successful college student should have are to work hard, keep a positive attitude, don’t procrastinate and learn from your failures. If we have all of these traits, we will earn the right to be successful students, but if we don’t have any of these traits than we really have our work cut out for us. The people that do the best in my classes have all of these traits. The students that don’t earn good grades don’t seem to have all of these traits. They are the ones that are always having fun at Joe’s, always have time to do things because they skip their classes, never find the library and don’t really seem to care about college.
Many parents including my own make student’s pay for part of our education at Alma College. Parents know that if a student is willing to pay for part of their college with their own money than that means that they are serious about their future. If the student has an investment in their education, they will take it more seriously and their chance of earned success is much higher than if the parents have paid for everything. When students use their own money to pay for college they seem to take it more seriously and work very hard to make sure they don’t loose their investment. Something earned by hard work is always of greater value than something given to us. Earned success is more valuable than attained or received success.
Hard work is the key to anyone’s success. To earn something it all begins with hard work. For over two hundred years people have come to America to live the American dream of becoming wealthy and successful. This dream is very simple, if a person works hard and uses the talents that they have they too can become a success in America, one of the wealthiest countries in the world. People have left there families behind in other countries, and risked their lives just for the chance at success. Today thousands of Mexican immigrants cross the border illegally just for that chance of earned success in America.
The best example of the American dream and earned success is a person who is homeless and lives on the streets as a beggar. Against all odds they get themselves off the streets, and get a start, and then build a fortune of wealth. Movies, television and the evening news remind us that success like this is possible every day. A recent movie titled Trading Places, is an example of a modern day homeless to wealth story. The main character in this movie is Billy Ray Valentine. He is homeless and lives on the streets of Philadelphia and he is a beggar. He lies, cheats and steals to survive. He has all the skills to earn success. He is smart, a good speaker and a good businessman but he never has the chance to prove himself. Billy Ray becomes part of a bet between the Duke brothers and they make a homeless person the head of their company. When given the chance Billy Ray did very well as the head of their company. The Dukes paid him a salary of $80,000 per year and they gave him a car, home, new clothes, a butler and an expense account. Billy Ray went from a homeless beggar on the street to a successful business man. This is what people work for, and this is why so many people come to America, to have a chance at earned success.
There are many ways to become successful in America today. People still become successful by working hard and saving their money, but there are also many ways to get rich quick. You can get rich by winning the lotto, gambling at a casino, becoming a professional athlete, becoming an actor or actress, the stock market, real estate and many more. No matter how much wealth, power or honors a person has they should not be considered a success unless they have truly earned it.
Tiffany Sedlar
2-2-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Journal #3 PLEASE READ FOR GROUP CONFERENCES
The word that I chose for this paper was success. It was a challenge to argue that my definition was better than the one I found on Dictionary .com. It took me a long time to think of something to write about and it was the first time I wrote an argument paper. The point that I could think of to argue was that success can only be earned it can’t be attained. This was actually something that my coaches and parents have told me all my life. My coaches have always said,”Hard work and teamwork will lead to success and if you want it you have to earn it.” The strategies that I used to argue my point were analogies and definition of the word. I also used pathos, logos and ethos to make my argument stronger and more believable.
The analogies that I used to make my point compared different ways you can attain success. Through luck you can be successful by winning the Lotto, or gambling, or you can have earned success like working hard to accomplish something. For and example of working hard I used an example of a college student and the things I do to be successful. I also used my experience as a college student as my ethos to gain credibility. The logos that I used, is that if you work hard in college, the result will be good grades and students will earn their success. To make the reader feel the emotion of what earned success can feel like I used the story of the homeless person rising to success. Earned success feels a lot better than success that was given to you.
Using these strategies for success I believe that my argument to change the definition of success from attained success to earned success was convincing. Success means something different to different people, but most would agree that the harder you work or the more you risk to earn success the more it means and the better it feels.
Tiffany Sedlar
2-17-08
English 101
Mary Wendt
Analysis and Evaluation
The two essays that will be analyzed and evaluated are Success of Military Diversity
Proves Affirmative Action Works by Wesley Clark and Affirmative Action Doctors Can
Kill You by Linda Chavez. Affirmative actions helps blacks and Hispanics get into college; get jobs, and government positions that they would have a hard time getting on their own. It has been around for many years and it has always been an issue of debate. Clark and Chavez continue this debate by offering strong arguments that are for and against it, but in the end one makes a stronger and more effective argument in my opinion. Wesley Clark has seen affirmative action succeed in the military and he offers an opinion that he is in favor of affirmative action, and that it is the only way to eliminate discrimination in America. He is very positive about his opinion but in the end offers the reader very little evidence to support his claims. Linda Chavez on the other hand shows that when black and Hispanic students are accepted into medical school because of affirmative action everyone involved is hurt and it may lead to fewer qualified doctors. Her essay is clearly against affirmative action and she offers evidence rather than opinions to support her claims. Linda Chavez’s essay is very persuasive because it appeals to emotion and offers excellent supporting evidence when compared to Wesley Clark’s that is strong in ethos but lacks evidence.
Clark and Chavez use logos, ethos, pathos, insights, assumptions and overgeneralizations very effectively to make their arguments in favor and against affirmative action. Chavez however, is much more effective than Clark in the use of logos and pathos. She seems more believable because she offers statistics and examples of what affirmative action does to the people involved. Because she is so much more effective that Clark in these two areas I think that most readers would side with her and would not want affirmative action.
Both writers use logos in their writing to help make their argument stronger. Clark writes, but the end of segregation did not mean the end of discrimination. Racial hatred has deep and pernicious roots in our nation’s history. It is a cancer that needs to be cured, and affirmative action has been one of the most effective treatments. (Clark, page 127) Clark’s argument that affirmative action can end discrimination seems logical. Chavez writes that, more than 3500 white and Asian students were not admitted to schools CEO studied, despite having better test scores than black and Hispanic applicants who were given preferential treatment. Since grades and, in particular, MCAT scores are very good predictors of performance on the licensing exams, we know that a higher percentage of these students would have passed the exams if they had been admitted. (Chavez page 129) Her argument seems logical that the better a student does on the MCAT the better they will do on medical licensing tests.
The writers use of ethos is were I found myself siding with Linda Chavez and disappointed with Wesley Clark. Clark saw discrimination growing up he wrote, Growing up in Little Rock, I saw firsthand the ugly legacy of racial discrimination. After the local schools were closed because of the battle over desegregation, I had to go to school in Tennessee for a year. (Clark page 127) He also showed that he was an expert in the field by writing, I know this firsthand from my 34 years in the United States military. (Clark page 127) I really expected Clark to be an expert on affirmative action. Instead he just offered his opinion and he didn’t write about studies, statistics and success stories. He seemed to be very interested in stopping discrimination but he didn’t do a very good job of showing how affirmative action stopped discrimination.
Linda Chavez is the opposite of Wesley Clark. The essay doesn’t say who she is, what her experience is or even where she is from. She has no credibility on her own, but her credibility as a writer comes from her sources. Her first source was a book written by William Bowen and Derek Bok called The Shape Of The River. Chavez wrote that racial preference was being given to minority students at the undergraduate level applies to graduate schools, too, including medical schools. (Chavez page 129) Her second source was The Center For Equal Opportunity (CEO). She found that black and Hispanic students are being admitted to medical school with substantially lower college grades and test scores than whites and Asians. (Chavez page 129) White and Asians didn’t get into medical school even though they had better test scores than Black and Hispanic students, it just doesn’t seem fair. The third source that she uses is the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT). From this source Chavez writes, but more disturbing even than the finding that medical schools seem to be admitting less qualified students on the basis of race and ethnicity is that many of these students can’t pass their licensing exams. (Chavez page 129) In my opinion these sources gives Chavez much more credibility than Clark. She uses all of these sources to show that affirmative action is wrong and that our doctors are not as qualified because of it. She makes a really strong case and I start to agree with her argument that affirmative action may be wrong.
Both Clark and Chavez use pathos effectively in their writing. However, I found myself more angry or thinking that something needs to be done about affirmative action when I read Chavez’s essay. Clark’s use of pathos makes us proud to be Americans. Clark writes, As a result of these policies, the military is one of the most integrated institutions in America. And our country is safer today because it is defended by a diverse, integrated, talented military that is the envy of the world! (Clark page 127) We feel safe we are protected by the best military in the world. What evidence does Clark offer that would make us believe that the military is the envy of the world because of affirmative action? None, and without answering this question he will never win the argument in my opinion. Clark needs to do a better job of getting the reader emotional about the topic.
Chavez uses pathos to make a real strong argument against affirmative action. She gets your attention right away in her title Affirmative Action Doctors Can Kill You. This title puts fear in the readers mind. If we go to a doctor that got into medical school because of affirmative action they may not be qualified and they may kill us. She starts out with this strong statement and ends with one as well, and all the rest of us-of all colors-suffer, too, from a shortage of qualified doctors. (Chavez page 129) This is intended to make the reader angry or emotional and make them want to stop affirmative action. The use of ethos by Chavez makes the reader start to agree with her argument and her use of pathos clearly makes her the winner of the argument.
Both writers use Insights to make their argument. Clark writes, the military is, in many ways, a microcosm of our society. (Clark Page 128) Clark makes this statement to show that if affirmative action works in the military it will work in society. Chavez also uses insights she writes, For the first time ever , we now have the hard numbers to prove that medical schools routinely give preference to less qualified black (and sometimes Hispanic) applicants than to others. This is new information and the main reason she doesn’t agree with affirmative action.
Assumptions are a big part of Clarks essay and they are also found in Chavez’s essay. Clark writes, the achievement of a diverse student body at a university, like the achievement of a diverse officer corps in the military, will make Michigan a better, more well rounded, more just institution. This information is an assumption and not based on fact. Too much of his paper is based on assumptions and opinions. Chavez also uses assumptions she writes, the assumption has been, however that these students somehow catch up over the next four years and go on to be just as successful as their white and Asian peers. Chavez uses this assumption to prove that affirmative action in medical schools does not work.
Overgeneralizations are used by both writers to make their arguments. Clark writes that, I believe without hesitation that we Democrats are right in our belief that affirmative action is good for all Americans. (Clark Page 127) Chavez also uses generalizations, she writes, by now, most Americans have gotten used to the idea that colleges and universities apply double standards when it comes to admitting black and Hispanic undergraduates-even if they don’t like it very much.
Both writers use logos, insight, assumptions and overgeneralizations very well to make their argument for and against affirmative action. Chavez however uses ethos and pathos much better than Clark. She seems more believable because she offers statistics and examples of what affirmative action does to the people involved. Because she is so much more effective that Clark in these two areas I think that most readers including myself would side with her and would not want affirmative action.
Proposal Questions
3-5-07
1. Should we build a fence around America to control immigration?
Some people think that we should build a fence around America to keep immigrants from other parts of the world out. Others believe that this will never work. How could we build a fence around the whole country and make sure no one climbs over it, they say it would just be impossible. And what about the 16 million illegal immigrants already in America? The fence will just keep them in America. Each presidential candidate has their own plan to deal with this problem but it is very unlikely that a fence around the country is the answer.
2. Will we ever have National Healthcare?
More than 46 million people in America don’t have health insurance today. They don’t have insurance because they can’t afford it or they can’t get it. If these people have to go to the hospital, they either have to pay for it or the bill never gets paid. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama think it is best to have health care for all Americans. They will offer the same insurance that they have as Senators to all Americans. Most people in America think that National Healthcare is a good idea. If one of these candidates win it is likely that we will have National Healthcare in the future.
3. Should we remove all of our troops from Iraq?
Most people in America would like to see the war end in Iraq and all of our troops come home safely. At this point this is very unlikely to happen. John McCain has said that we will have troops in Iraq for the next 100 years. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama call for a slow removal. With more than 230,000 troops in Iraq today it is not likely that all troops will be coming home soon. They are there to help the Iraq government keep peace until the government of Iraq is strong enough to keep the peace themselves. The troops are not the only Americans in Iraq there are business people, construction workers, charity workers and government officials.
Many people fear that all Americans will be killed if they are left behind in Iraq. These people include the thousands of Americans there helping to rebuild the country. There are also many charities working there. The Red Cross alone has thousands of workers. And the government workers helping to form a government in Iraq. We can’t just remove all of our troops from Iraq. All Americans will be at risk.
Tiffany Sedlar
3-13-07
1. An Analysis of Senator John McCains Health Care Reform Plan , January 9, 2008
Summary: John McCaines plan for health care is completely different than Hillary
Clinton or Barack Obama. His focus will be on costs. He believes that insurance is a
personal choice and each individual has to take responsibility for that decision. He
will make sure health care is affordable for everyone.
2. Black, Kevin. “2 Plans and Many Questions on The Uninsured.” The New York Times.
Summary: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have similar plans to change health care
in The United States. Clinton would make health care mandatory for every American.
Obama would lower premiums so every American could afford insurance but wouldn’t
make it mandatory. Most agree that this would never work.
3. Krugman, Paul “Clinton, Obama, Insurance.” The New York Times
Summary: Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in favor of universal health
care. Hillary Clintons plan will cover all Americans. Obama’s plan will not be
mandatory so millions of Americans will not have health insurance.
4. Obama, Barack “Plan For a Healthy America
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/</span>
Summary: Barack Obama will make affordable health insurance available to all
Americans. It will be a national health plan. All children will have to have health
insurance. Obama feels that all adults will want to have insurance because it will be
affordable. The health insurance that will be available to all Americans is the same
insurance government employees have now.
5. Rau, Jordan “Political Muscle Health Care Hints” Los Angeles Times
Summary: Govenor Arnold Swarzenegger said that uninsured patients that never pay
their bills costs hospitals in California billions of dollars. Tax payers end up paying
these bills in a “Hidden Tax”, it costs the average family in California 1,200.00 a year.
6. Reinhardt, Uwe E. “Time for Health Care Realism” The Philadelphia Inquirer
Summary: Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in favor of universal
healthcare. Congress is very unlikely to support any form of universal healthcare. So
it really doesn’t matter what either of them say or promise. Congress are the ones that
will vote no on the issue and they are likely to vote no. They are not willing to spend
60 to 110 billion dollars on health insurance.
3-18-03
First part of paper
Healthcare Vote 2008
In November voters will elect a new President of the United States. There are many reasons why people vote for different candidates. One of the issues that voters are concerned about this year is Healthcare. Healthcare has become a major problem for millions of Americans. Healthcare in America is no longer the best in the world. The cost for healthcare has also gone up so much that many people can no longer afford it. Because people can no longer afford health insurance millions of adults and children don’t have any insurance at all. They just hope that they don’t become sick or need to go to the hospital. The Presidential election has been narrowed down to three candidates. Two of these candidates are Democratic and one of them is a Republican. The Democratic Party has promised the people of America change. The two candidates are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both of these candidates have promised to completely change Healthcare if they are elected President. The Republican Party does not believe that much change is needed in our healthcare system. John McCain will be the Republican Party’s candidate for President in November. He doesn’t believe that the government should make people have health insurance. He believes it is a personal choice for every American. The one promise that John McCain does make is that he will lower the cost of health insurance so that more people will be able to afford it. The programs that these candidates have come up with are very different. It is up to the voters to decide which candidates program will be the best for them.
The problems with health insurance include the millions of Americans that are uninsured or underinsured because of rising medical costs. This has happened because health insurance premiums have risen 4 times faster than wages over the past 6 years. The result is that over 47 million Americans – including nearly 9 million children – lack health insurance with no signs of this trend slowing down. (Plan For A Healthy America page. 2)
Arnold Schwarzenegger the governor of California said that the heavy cost of providing medical care to the 47 million uninsured people, through emergency rooms and the like is a “hidden tax”. He also said, “And as you know, by federal law emergency rooms are not allowed to turn away anybody. So with the 6.5 million uninsured residents, California has a health care crisis, we have a serious crisis. In just this one hospital alone here they’re sending out bills worth 60 million dollars a year that are related to ER care, but they have not been paid. Now, multiply that out by the amount of hospitals that we have in California and it will come out with a number that goes into the billions. (Political Muscle page. 1)
Schwarzenegger goes on to say, “ Now, guess who is paying for those billions of dollars? It’s you, me, everyone is paying for that. So working families who have medical insurance get clobbered with hidden taxes; as a matter of fact, each individual pays an additional $400 to $500 on those hidden taxes, and a family of four pay $1,200.(Political Muscle page. 1)
The candidate that wants to change health care the most is Hillary Clinton. Her plan for health care will change it completely. She believes as does Arnold Schwarzenegger that America can’t keep paying the hospital bills for 47 million uninsured people. Right now there are over 47 million people that don’t have health insurance in America, under Hillary Clintons plan every person will be required to have health insurance. She believes that the only way to achieve universal health coverage, and to make the marketplace fair and efficient , is to require that everyone have insurance.(2 Plans and Many Questions on the Uninsured page.1)
Hillary Clintons plan is called, ”The American Health Choices Plan”. There are five major parts to her plan.
(1) Offer new Coverage Choices for the insured and Uninsured: Americans can keep the insurance that they have now if they like it. If not, they can choose to have the same insurance as the Congress has now. In addition to the broad array of private options that Americans can choose from, they will be offered the choice of a public plan option similar to Medicare. (The American Health Choices Plan, page. 1)
(2) Lower Premiums and Increase Security: This plan will lower insurance costs and improve the quality of health care. The plan ensures that if a person loses their job or they become sick they will not be dropped from their insurance. No American be refused insurance coverage because they have been sick.
(3) Promote Shared Responsibility: This plan ensures that all who benefit from the system share in the responsibility to fix its shortcomings. (The American Health Choices Plan page 2.) Insurance companies, drug companies, individuals, providers, employers and government are all going to have to work together for this plan to fix the health care problem.
(4) Ensure Affordable Health Coverage for All: Working families will receive a refundable tax credit to help them afford high-quality health coverage. Small businesses will receive a health care tax credit as an incentive to have health care for their employees.
(5) A fiscally Responsible Plan that Honors our Priorities: Over half the savings come from the public savings generated from Hillary Clinton’s broader agenda to modernize the health systems and reduce wasteful health spending. The plan offers tens of millions of Americans a new tax credit to make premiums affordable. (The American Health Choices Plan page. 3)
Many people think that her plan can work because she is requiring that every person has health insurance. It will be mandatory for everyone. According to Jonathon Gruber MLT who is one of America’s leading health care economists insuring every American is critical and this can only be done through mandates. Mr. Gruber finds that a plan with mandates would cost taxpayers about $2,700 per person to cover every person. As with any economic analysis, Mr. Gruber’s result are only as good as his model. But they’re consistent with the results of other analysis, such as a 2003 study, commissioned by the Robert Wood Foundation, that compared health reform plans and found that mandates made a big difference both to success in covering the uninsured and to cost effectiveness. And that’s why many health care experts like Mr. Gruber strongly support mandates. (Clinton, Obama, Insurance page.2)
Hillary Clinton believes that her plan is the right one for America. She says,” My plan covers all Americans and improves health care by lowering costs and improving quality. If you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans without coverage or if you don’t like the coverage you have, you will have a choice of plans to pick from and you’ll get tax credits to help pay for it. If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. It’s a plan that works for America’s families and America’s businesses, while preserving consumer choices.” (The American Health Choices Plan page. 12)
Barack Obama has also promised to completely change healthcare if he is elected President. He thinks that millions of Americans don’t have health insurance because it is too expensive.